Voice of the people (letter).

Safe trains

June 07, 2002|By Carl Schafter.

Port Washington, Wis. — I would like to comment on a recent letter regarding Amtrak security. While I am not affiliated with Amtrak, I have completed dozens of round trips on the passenger rail carrier over the past five years, so I feel that I have the ability to comment.

The nature of train travel doesn't allow "airport-style" security. With stations every few dozen miles, more than 500 in all, it is not feasible to staff security and install metal detectors at stations.

Because of Amtrak's current budget situation, some stations cannot even be staffed by ticket agents, let alone full security, as in an airport.

According to sources, the crime rate on Amtrak trains is comparable to society as a whole, if not better. Using common sense, I do not feel one bit unsafe on any trains.

Regarding the potential of drug trade, for numerous years the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and Amtrak, in cooperation with local law enforcement, have been extremely successful in seizing drugs on one train in particular, the Chicago-to-Los-Angeles Southwest Chief. No doubt operations like these are taking place throughout the system.

For example, on a recent trip, due to a possible safety threat, FBI agents boarded our train west of Kansas City and inspected luggage, including a dog search in Kansas City. The FBI and Amtrak do work together.

Due to the unique 24/7 operation of rail service, it is not possible to announce safety procedures after every stop. A 2:30 in the morning loudspeaker announcement wouldn't go over very well.

A packet explaining safety procedures is in every seatback.

The time and convenience advantage that trains give, from Metra commuter rides to Amtrak cross-country trips, will disappear if a half-hour is spent in a security line. While safety is the most important thing, security is very adequate for what is possible on trains.